The Tavern

This game needs to be harder, I already have 5 wins out of only 2000~ games.

One dev actually thinks this btw, and I agree with him. If game ramp up difficulty to impossible, then we can see who is really the best player by who gets furthest, and not just whos patient enough to get long winstreak.

Unfortunately, devs do not apply the logic evenly to make the early game easier. Maybe its important for DCSS to teach new players that dying can be fun, I dont know.

Iethediver: I think you mean me, and if so, you have misunderstood: it was a thought experiment, and "no game winnable" was one of two extreme states. I am very fine with players winning. I do think it'd be better if it happened less often, even for the best of them.

Tiktacy: Unfortunately, Brent Ross' Crawl 4.2 alpha (which can be played on CDO) has been proved to be winnable, but for the longest time it was believed to be unwinnable. It has some appeal if you start a game knowing that you will die, but perhaps you go deeper than you've ever been. Perhaps you should try it!

dpeg wrote:Iethediver: I think you mean me, and if so, you have misunderstood: it was a thought experiment, and "no game winnable" was one of two extreme states. I am very fine with players winning. I do think it'd be better if it happened less often, even for the best of them.

Tiktacy: Unfortunately, Brent Ross' Crawl 4.2 alpha (which can be played on CDO) has been proved to be winnable, but for the longest time it was believed to be unwinnable. It has some appeal if you start a game knowing that you will die, but perhaps you go deeper than you've ever been. Perhaps you should try it!

Thanks for the clarification, and that fork sounds interesting... I will contact you tomorrow or so after i have beaten it.

What makes Brent Ross' Crawl 4.2 Alpha provably unwinnable?

milski wrote:What makes Brent Ross' Crawl 4.2 Alpha provably unwinnable?

He said winnable, not unwinnable, I assume it was proven by at least one person winning.

Siegurt wrote:
milski wrote:What makes Brent Ross' Crawl 4.2 Alpha provably unwinnable?

He said winnable, not unwinnable, I assume it was proven by at least one person winning.

In fact, I think there might even be two wins.

advil wrote:
Siegurt wrote:
milski wrote:What makes Brent Ross' Crawl 4.2 Alpha provably unwinnable?

He said winnable, not unwinnable, I assume it was proven by at least one person winning.

In fact, I think there might even be two wins.

Bug reports should go to mantis.

What if crawl had 2 winning stances? You win when you destroy the orb and you extra win if you escape the dungeon after that.

What made 4.2 almost unwinnable?

difficulty

IIRC if a monster had a shield it was almost impossible to kill.

And if by some miracle you reached the midgame, MR was nearly impossible to get and chain paralysis was not disallowed, so if you walked into the sight of a sphinx or GOOE, it was game over.

Alright, where can I play this mystical 4.1.2 alpha? Sounds to me like it needs an experimental fork on berotato.

what part of CDO don't you understand, Pig??

Uh.. any of it, apparently.

OK I googled it, I'm back, now I know so many things.

HardboiledGargoyle wrote:what part of CDO don't you understand, Pig??

The part we don't understand is where the fuck it is.

Just link it god damnit, I just spent 45 minutes trying to find it and the earliest version I could find was 0.10.

4.1.2 is console only, just connect to crawl.develz.org through PuTTY or KiTTY, instructions are here: http://crawl.develz.org/wordpress/howto

The Tavern

It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the orb

It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the orb

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the

Re: It should be theoretically impossible to ascend with the